Have you read the book of Revelation? Because that guides a lot of evangelicals right now. That’s why they go to places like Uganda. It’s not the great commission these days anymore, the evangelicals are working as hard as they can to fulfill prophecy from the new testament so that the world, this world, can be over, no matter what the cost.
8 Likes
It matters to me personally because the president elect has said that women who get abortions should be punished. It matters to me personally because he says that muslims shouldn’t be allowed to immigrate into our country. It matters to me personally because he’s decided that positions like secretary of state and so forth should be filled with racists, bigots, climate change deniers, anti-science simpletons, hateful shitweasels and worse. You know, the typical fascist tactic.
I take it personally because I grew up, and currently live with evangelicals, who think it’s important to get all the Jews to Israel, so that jesus can come back and they’ll get raptured, and the end of the world can happen.
10 Likes
Yes but I cat say I’m familiar with all the eschatological understandings that exist these days. That said I do understand the basic ideas around Christian end things scenarios.
I get that they borrowed our idea that the messiah will cause all Jews to return to the land of Israel and that they differ as to what happens after that as well as the nature/job description of the messiah.
Yeah I get that and it is entirely consistent with the professed thought system. That is to say they practice what they preach 
Consistency is actually a wonderful thing, it can be a guide to predicting how others s act.
1 Like
DJT has said lots of things over the years. Lots of which contradict each other. I’m of the “wait and see” school of thought.
I’m of the school of thought that says: “Make sure this fucking horrific shit he says he’ll do, doesn’t happen.”
There actually are one or two things he’s said he’ll do that I agree with. But it doesn’t remotely outweigh the damage he’d do if he were honest. And even liars show their true intentions sometimes, whether people realize it or not.
It’s a values thing. As far as I can tell, he doesn’t sincerely value people. He talks like a sociopath or psychopath. And I grew up with one. Everything he says seems like a lie to me. Due to his prior actions and speech. He’s a liar as far as I can tell, and I don’t expect my predictions of the results of his lies will line up with what will eventually happen.
10 Likes
Intelligent tweaks.
1 Like
What if DJT owned a pair of these shoes? What if he invested in the manufacturer?
One final thought:
I agree with this guy on mechanism. But I don’t think I’m as soft as him…
I think he’s got a lot of legitimate points, but I also think that:
“Equality can feel like oppression. But it’s not. What you’re feeling is just the discomfort of losing a little bit of your privilege.”
3 Likes
Just to be clear.
That’s what you did to Cory, and that’s what you have also somehow managed to do to me, even though I am satirising you.
Some highlights:
Set up for the ‘behavioural’ punchline. lol
“Even though I brought it up, it’s totally just worthless talk-for-talks-sake when others engage with these ideas.” lolol
“When I do it, I am calmly making a valid point. When others do it, they are literally raving lunatics.”
“Satirical criticism of my conduct is an overblown crusade.”
When it boils down to it all we really have, online, is our conduct toward one another. Disagreement is fine, but projection of our own ideas and motivations onto other people should probably not be done in an arena that strives to not make such assumptions.
Bringing religion into everything as if it naturally belongs there is pushing the envelope of discussion in a ‘proselytising’ fashion, but it’s as if you don’t see this as being something that can even be criticised.
When I talk about invasion of memetic space, I’m really just using terminology for ‘ideas’. Remaining cognisant of making such basic assumptions about the substrate of discourse that exists here is exactly what this place is all about. And it is why you might think about what motivates you to react with whatever behaviour the above quotes represent when someone addresses you on the topic.
I don’t trust a word out of his mouth, and his actions over the past two weeks have shown that he couldn’t care less about things like “promises”. He self-contradicts constantly.
However, he’s also shown himself to be very susceptible to suggestion by those close to him, and he’s surrounded himself quickly with people who don’t contradict themselves and who are extraordinarily dangerous:
• A chief advisor who’s a known anti-semite and white supremacist
• A vice president who’s an evolution denier and known enemy to GLBT rights
• A chief justice who was kicked out of the government for being too racist
• A national security advisor who hates Islam so much that he believes Sharia law is spreading through the US and wants to eliminate Islam worldwide
• A Secretary of Education who loathes public education, wants to instill Christianity into all education, and has said she wants to bring back child labor
• A head of domestic policy who heads an anti-GLBT hate group who’s said their mission is to eliminate homosexuality
There’s no “wait and see” with known quantities.
15 Likes
2 Likes
Yeah, but the best German industrial music is Slovenian…
dances mit Laibach
4 Likes
What is up was down and left was right? What if clouds were cotton candy?
Donald Trump eats pizza, obviously us dumb lib’ruls must hate pizza too!
1 Like
Visible, I doubt the footprints are legible.
What if God was one of us? Just a slob like one of us? Would God wear atheist shoes too?
4 Likes
While this isn’t worth belaboring, I haven’t made shoes passive aggressively proclaiming I don’t believe something (with a passive-aggressive note cleverly left behind in every footstep), nor promoted those shoes to others so they too can participate, nor when questioned about that evangelizing, dishonestly changed the topic by offering a confused argument that sloppily conflated religion and theism. These shoes and the argument I was responding to were both evangelical in nature, and my plea was an attempt to drop the evangelizing behavior by pointing out that Cory’s dodge wouldn’t persuade anyone who didn’t already believe (the argument’s rank bullshit, and can’t convert anyone who isn’t in the fold). I was tempted to point out the ways it was flawed, but realized that would rat-hole hideously, would be cruel to onlookers, and I really didn’t care, so it wasn’t worth it. I admit I should have left it at that though and not bothered replying to your initial response. Everything was already enough of a pointless mess.
For the record, I do have religious views and also have theological views. Since I’m an atheist (sort of, with qualifications) and also a religious adherent, it’s immediately clear in a direct, personal way that Cory’s argument was incoherent nonsense. But I’ve left my religion (Buddhism) out of the discussion up to now. I don’t want to convert you or anyone, my religion’s a private matter, and I am inherently opposed to attempts to convert on numerous grounds.
And with that I’ll be done, since as I’d mentioned before, I think the whole domain innately doesn’t admit careful arguments with any technical precision and rigor since it’s too sloppy to ever accept them. As a result everyone spouts hot air for as along as they participate (as I am, there are a dozen things I said needing footnotes and clarification already here). I don’t want to keep that going. Arguing about religion on the internet is an energy vampire, and cruel to onlookers, and even trying to persuade others it’s a pointless task can go that way, alas, hence the reason I’m out.
2 Likes
Well. OK. Colour me confused though. I was responding to your comments about whether ‘subscribing to religion at all’ was an epistemological preference. It seemed as though you had taken the position that this was not possible and I had attempted to keep my comments specific to that argument but in reading your responses I’m not so sure that I’ve managed.
If your argument is that Cory’s statement is invalid because the whole domain does not admit careful arguments with any technical precision then it is specifically that argument with which I disagree. Cory’s statement was specific and true. Yours is both untrue and a fudge and is followed by a statement immediately nixing further discussion on the topic, which seems to me to be a strange thing to do in a public format and therefore worthy of redress.
I’m genuinely sorry that we couldn’t find a way to talk about it. The repartee is why I’m here.
- These shoes look terrible
- There’s no tread. A bit of water on my porch and I’d slipping and sliding all over the place.
8 Likes
Something about donuts?
2 Likes
